|
|
|
|
Ok, this is going to sound like bragging, but I ran accross something I didnt know and had never heard the story. Has anyone ever noticed that the American flag never salutes the head of state of the country hosting the Olympics? It was tradition for the flag of each country in the Olympics to dip as the athelites passed the box of the head of state. In 1908 at the Olympics in London the American flag bearer was told by Martin Sheridan, that if he dipped the flag he would be in the hospital that night. As the American contingent passed in front of Edward VII, the flag did not dip and Sheridan made the statement "This flag dips for no earthly king". This explains why the American flag is never dipped at the Olympics and is always upright.
I dont know if anyone else thinks this is interesting but I do. I was asked to look up some Olympics facts for a friend and ran accross this. Hope the Brits here dont take offense, you know I love all of you.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
Who was Martin Sheridan?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sheridan was a Tri-athelite, but was best known in discus throwing.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typical American arrogance. In all seriousness.
Sorry, but what other possible response is there? 
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jedediah
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: Made in NZ
Registered: March 2006
Messages: 170
|
|
|
David, I agree 100%. Americans, generally, are good people, but they can be blindly patriotic - much like other arrogant empires throughout history.
cheers
E Te Atua tukuna mai ki au te Mauri tauki te tango i nga mea
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a member of what was once the British Empire, I would feel nothing but embarrassment if that were one of my country's traditions. Dipping a flag is about respect, not subservience. It's like George Bush refusing to shake the Queen's hand (or, indeed, vice versa -- that would be equally rude).
It's not just about national policy. I also feel profoundly embarrassed when ordinary British people go and take liberties in other people's countries, whether that's as reprehensible as football hooliganism or as trivial as not bothering to take any interest in the local people or language.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deeej, one of the reasons the Americans did what they did is because The British failed to put up an American flag with all the others in the arena. When it was brought to their attention, they refused to put one up. Finland was also treated the same way.
I had never heard this story till I ran accross it. America stuggled to win its independance from a foreign government and I think the message was that America will never serve under another power.
Britain and America have a strong tie, probably stronger than most. Even tho we fought two wars, we have still remained friends. Its kind of like two brothers fighting, but woe to the outsider who lays a hand on either one.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly, why did they refuse to put one up? Secondly, if it's actually true, who refused to put one up? (Was it a petty-minded bureaucrat or an Olympic committee decision? I don't think "the British" can possibly mean every British person.)
I'd like to see a reliable reference, please.
This is one of those stories that sounds to me like it is designed to appeal to American patriotism and annoy everyone else. The Olympics is about forging links between nations, not severing them.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, this is definitely wrong:
>Finland was also treated the same way.
They were expected to march under the Russian flag, but not by the British, but by the Russians, who were occupying the country.
In addition, the Wikipedia article says,
>The United States flag had also not been displayed above the stadium before the opening so the United States' flag bearer refused to dip the flag to the royal box. Though the flag was later dipped in the collective greeting of the royal family, Martin Sheridan, American team captain, gave the explanation that "This flag dips to no earthly king."[1] Despite international customs that encourage dipping the flag as a sign of respect to heads of state, since 1908 US flag bearers have followed a tradition of not doing so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1908_Summer_Olympics
It doesn't say anything about why this happened. According to
http://www.allstates-flag.com/fotw/flags/oly@stor.html
they simply forgot. What is your source for "When it was brought to their attention, they refused to put one up"?
I will continue to look until I can clear this up.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you 100% that the Olympics should be free from politics, but thats never going to happen. Its up to the American citizens and all other people to work around our governments policys. Most people are good people and have no problem getting along with each other. Unfortunately there are people like Bush running loose in the world.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm confused. Those sources don't back up much that you've said -- in fact, the PDF renders invalid almost every single one of your claims! Did you actually read it, Roger?
>The British failed to put up an American flag with all the others in the arena. When it was brought to their attention, they refused to put one up.
This was apparently a mistake, and nowhere in either source does it say anything about refusing. In contrast, the PDF says:
>the officials of both countries were upset by this oversight, for which the British Olympic Council did later apologize.
You also said,
>Finland was also treated the same way.
The PDF says,
>It is a gross oversimplification to state that no Finnish flag was present and the Finns were upset by this "oversight". [... In fact, ] Russia refused to allow Finland to compete as an indepdent nation and carry the Finnish flag.
While Finland may have been upset, I don't think you can say it was the fault of the British.
You didn't mention Sweden, whose flag was also forgotten. They, however, did not leave the Olympics and competed normally, as the PDF explains. Whether the flag was actually dipped at all seems to be in some doubt -- there is very little reference in the press outside America, so presumably this myth has been hyped by all it's worth pretty much exclusively by Americans. There's also no mention of Sheridan having said "This flag dips to no earthly king" at the time -- the connection with his name only occurs after WWII.
You say,
>America stuggled to win its independance from a foreign government and I think the message was that America will never serve under another power.
Well, perhaps that's the point of the story, but it is largely just a story intended to make Americans feel good at the expense of others, and therefore quoting out of the blue it to a number of pedantic Englishmen is rather likely to get you flamed!
>Britain and America have a strong tie, probably stronger than most. Even tho we fought two wars, we have still remained friends. Its kind of like two brothers fighting, but woe to the outsider who lays a hand on either one.
Well... I'm not sure to what extent each one is willing to protect the interests of the other. Countries tend to look out for their own interests. For a while it's been in the best interests of both the US and the UK to remain friends, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it will always be so. There are great cultural and political differences that are largely masked by the common language. Sorry -- I'm feeling cynical tonight. That is not, of course, to suggest that individuals from each country cannot be friends or even brothers.
David
[Updated on: Thu, 29 March 2007 01:04] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Flag_Code
I understand that there was some controversy about what happened, but something did happen and the American flag has never been dipped as a salute since then.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.marathonguide.com/training/coachmindy/history2.cfm
I went thru about 200 links looking for different facts about the Olympics and most of them had this story. Wheather all the facts are true or not one thing remains, something happened. I did err on the finland thing. It was Sweden. Of course I wasnt there and can only go by what I read. It was interesting because it would explain why the American flag never dips at Olympic events. There were a lot of other controversys that year concerning the Olympics, but like everything else everybody got over it.
I think the U.S. and Britain pretty much watch each others back. Blair sided with Bush on the Iraq thing and we all know we were wrong doing what we did. At least the Democrates are trying to get us out of there.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger said,
>Wheather all the facts are true or not one thing remains, something happened.
I'm not pretending it didn't. All I'm saying is that getting the details wrong so as to make another country look bad is somewhat inflammatory!
I'm assuming you didn't read
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/JOH/JOHv7n3/JOHv7n3i.pdf
because it's actually quite interesting and makes a genuine attempt to separate fact from fiction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Flag_Code
baffles me a bit. A flag is a flag is a flag. You don't need to honour a flag to be loyal to your country.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On my original statement I said nothing that would make Britain look bad. There seems to be a lot of different opinions about what actually occured. It appears they are not even sure who the flag bearer was. If you took offense at what I said then I appologise.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the flag is not just a piece of cloth. its a symbol. it represents your country and everything it stands for.
the UK has a very similar code for flag display, whether it be the Cross of St George (or any other regional flag) or the Union Flag. Its called the Flag Etiquette. it doesn't have the force of law, but is merely a set of traditions.
i've heard the story about the 1908 olympics before. my only comment is that dipping the flag is both a salute, and a form of respect. warships still dip their ensigns to each other a method of saluting (including US ones) and every remembrance sunday parade, the colours are always dipped to the war memorial, including the Union Flag, for the those parades that use it. Its respect.
from my point of view, the US refusing to dip its flag in salute to the head of state of a nation hosting US teams, is the US refusing to respect other nations and their worth, an attitude that is all too common with America on the whole, and a great many Americans, alas.
Odi et amo: quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.
Nescio, set fieri sentio et excrucior
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aden said,
>the flag is not just a piece of cloth. its a symbol. it represents your country and everything it stands for.
I would agree with you that for many people it does represent their country. But I also maintain that it doesn't have to, and that one can be perfectly and acceptably patriotic without ascribing any huge significance to it.
I generally find a Union Jack a friendly symbol, but there are literally hundreds of symbols of Britishness and Englishness that mean far more to me, and I would be far sorrier to see go. (Not that I'm suggesting it should go in the least.)
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger said,
>On my original statement I said nothing that would make Britain look bad.
Maybe not in the original post, but in the follow-up you said,
>When it was brought to their attention, they refused to put one up.
This ascribes bad intentions rather than a simple bureaucratic cock-up. I have not seen anything suggesting that that was the case in any other article. Thus I surmise that you added this yourself. It does make Britain look worse than it would have done otherwise.
I'm sorry for being pedantic, but that's just the way I am. Let's move on.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Respect is a thing earned..... never bestowed.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
The US seems to venerate its flag in a way that is strange, though. Pledging allegiance to a flag has always seemed peculiar to me. Surely one pledges that to a nation, or to a leader?
What the incident (as described) looks like is the actions of a tin-pot bully, later justified because he was called to account over it. Really that just reminds us that alleged sporting superheros are pretty ordinary people in their emotional and intellectual lives, and that future teams were simply too stupid to realise that this supposed tradition is a rather poor marketing position.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Union Jack?
you don't see many british Union Jacks around these days... thanks to the current government...
a Jack is the flag flown from the jackstaff of a warship when moored. the Union Jack is the name for the official Jacks of both the Royal and US Navy.
In the Royal Navy, its the Union Flag flown in a 3:2 aspect ratio (as opposed to the usual 2:1 ratio)
In the US Navy, the Union Jack is the blue quarter of the US flag, with 50 stars, though currently, all US warships are under orders to fly the First Navy Jack instead...
the correct name for our national flag is the Union Flag
[/rant]
lol sorry...
Timmy, again, its symbolism. the Flag represents the Nation and all it stands for, the ideals the United States was founded on (and now ignores). In pledging allegiance to the flag, you also pledge allegiance to everything the flag represents.
Our own flag isn't such a powerful symbol, for two reasons. One, we have a far stronger regional nationalism than most parts of the united states, with people equally as prepared to fly the Cross of St George, Cross of St Andrew and the Red Dragon as they are the Union Flag. Two, the US has no ongoing perpetual figurehead to represent their nation. While the office of the President may live on, the president himself comes and goes and is a transient figure, whereas we have a Monarch who can be, and is, a national symbol in her own right. A US citizen pledges loyalty to the flag of the United States, a British citizen is one of Her Majesty's subjects, and has their loyalty to Queen and Country on sacred trust. The US has but one very powerful symbol, the Flag, and a few weaker ones, like the White House because everything else is transient. We have far more institutions that can and are used to represent our national ideals, something helped even more by the fact that our country contains 4 nations.
Symbols can be powerful, because they can easily and visually represent the core ideals and beliefs of the group represented by the symbol, and therefore to show respect to the symbol is to respect those ideals, to attack the symbol is to attack the ideals.
Odi et amo: quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.
Nescio, set fieri sentio et excrucior
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aden pedanticised,
>the correct name for our national flag is the Union Flag
Yeah, I knew that, just like I know that you're not supposed to randomly split infinitives, or use prepositions to end sentences with. But sometimes it's just easier to say whatever's most common, and most people I know call it the Union Jack.
Hmmph.
As a pedant, I'd probably have said exactly the same thing had I not explained this to myself as I wrote it.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
i never referred to the flag as a "jack"
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
laws governing the use of flags are still covered by admiralty law.... though rarely enforced (if ever). the admiralty got really annoyed when parliament granted the royal air force permission to fly the RAF ensign from their stations.
in theory, flying the royal standard or the white ensign is illegal (unless you're the queen, or have permission from the admiralty) but both flags are freely available to buy and are often seen...
we brits should be well up on our flags, the british Flag Institute is the largest vexillological organisation in the world, and a founding member of the international body FIAV
Odi et amo: quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.
Nescio, set fieri sentio et excrucior
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do wish that millions and millions of people all over the world read this board. The truth about this awful country might stop a few hundred thousand of the illegal immigrants from sneaking across our boarders each year. Our government doesn't seem to understand its duty is to protect our boarders before spending billions helping others that hate our guts.
Sealing our boards would in a way be doing those trying to sneak in a big favor. The poor souls have no idea what skumbags we are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uncle Jim wrote:
> I do wish that millions and millions of people all over the world read this board. The truth about this awful country might stop a few hundred thousand of the illegal immigrants from sneaking across our boarders each year. Our government doesn't seem to understand its duty is to protect our boarders before spending billions helping others that hate our guts.
>
> Sealing our boards would in a way be doing those trying to sneak in a big favor. The poor souls have no idea what skumbags we are.
Here in the UK, that reads as having been posted at 0713 (GMT) on 1st April, and I'm reading it at around 1045 (BST) on 1st April.
Which seems somehow appropriate.
[Updated on: Sun, 01 April 2007 09:51]
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Uncle Jim,
I am another of those horrible Americans. I guess we should learn our lesson about doing things we think are right to do in the world. I kind of agree with you but would carry it a bit further.
I would never had said this when I was in my 20's but now I think we should be totally isolationist. We should, at the first instance we are asked (and maybe even if we are not asked), pull all our troops and close our bases in places such as Saudia Arabia, Turkey, and any other place that wishes we were not there as a military presence. It is time we simply took care of our own states and peoples and let the world do as it pleased. I guess using our Navy only for defense and staying totally out of everyone else's way.
We have enough oil in our own areas to take care of our needs well into the future and perhaps Canada will also continue to sell to us as they have in the past. There is also that huge oil reserve found recently in the Gulf of Mexico that seems to be larger than in the Mid East.
I have often thought in the past months that we try to hard to manage some of the world's problems and should let their neighbors take care of the problem themselves. For instance as to the problem with North Korea, simply give the Chinese assurance that we will not interfere with whatever they deem necessary to feel secure about that country. Problem will be solved most quickly I would bet.
Yes, we should keep our opinions and our resources to ourselves and let others do entirely as they please. I imagine there are going to be some conflicts of interest, but I think if we are not willing to use any kind of military pressure on anyone, the things will resolve themselves just fine. We can still retaliate against any country that would bring harm to our shores and we can assure them that as we did with the Soviet Union, they are in no harm's way unless they attack us with military force. We could tighten security and demand that our trade balance be at even with any nation wanting to trade with us. I am sure it would work out and we could just keep to ourselves and then everyone would be much happier.
If we did that, we could elect any asshole we wished and noone would care the slightest.
I was always ashamed that we allowed some of the criminals from the Nazi state to work for our intelligence services after WWII and similar things we did in the cold war. We should never have made any deals with dictators in the mideast or elsewhere no matter what advantage it gave to the Soviets. I think maybe in the long run it would have worked out better.
To those who don't know any better, the USA was extremely isolationist after WWI and in my opinion it helped forge some of the situations that led to WWII. Of course it is only my opinion.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
the 1908 Olympics 
Re: How peculiar. 
